Showing posts with label pork. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pork. Show all posts

11 March 2009

Pretty Soon, We'll be Talkin' Real Money

Last night, the Senate passed the omnibus spending bill, allowing the measure to move to President Obama's desk where he's expected to immediately sign it. The bill is only a budget-filler to take the government through until September, when the trillion-dollar-plus budget for 2010 is expected to come up.

I don't object to passing a budget - it's a necessary exercise. But the $8-billion in pet projects really bug me, and the fact that a number of prominent Republicans/traitors support the earmark process makes it doubly hard to swallow.

The big immediate excuse by all for those earmarks?
"It is in America's best interest to close the book on the last administration and let the new one hit the ground running," said Sen. Daniel Inouye, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Please; Congress holds the purse-strings and determines what is in and out of the budget. Even if President Bush had personally requested each and every earmark (the largest requester by dollar value is Murtha, and the largest by number of earmarks is Shelby), blaming what is chosen today on something that originally came up for debate on a prior Administration (Bush refused to sign this bill until some of the earmarks were removed) is the height of childishness.

Here is a list of all the earmarks by dollar value. Strangely, one of the other reasons offered up for allowing the bill to pass as is, is that the earmark dollar value, as a percent of the total budget, is small, and that focus on that small amount is simply diversionary. Wow! $8-billion is such a small amount that you shouldn't worry your pretty little head about it. Now go back to the corner and play with your dolls. Here's a thought - I don't care if the amount is only $1-million. It's the corruption and waste that bothers me.

The long-term excuse for continuing the earmark culture is that the money would be spent anyway, and Congressional members are simply ensuring a 'fair share' for their individual states. This is an amazingly duplicitous argument. It would be reasonable to fight for a block of money to go to one's state or district, and then let the local and state governments go through their normal budgeting and allocation process. Instead, by having Congress decide which individuals projects are funded, local and state governments, and the normal bidding process are circumvented. This power can only lead to corruption in the end, and that end result is the reason McCain has been screaming about earmarks for twenty years.

23 February 2009

UPDATE 2: Another Day, Another Market Tumble

All three major US stock indicators (Dow, NASDAQ, S&P) are down again, the Dow sliding to levels below those seen after the tech/internet-bubble blew.

It seems every time President Obama, Sen. Dodd, Sen. Reid, Rep. Pelosi or any of the President's economic team speaks about the economy, the markets slide even further. Maybe they should just be quiet.

Meanwhile, the President insists he can cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term (talk about optimism), and is set for a third shot at the Secretary of Commerce with Gov. Locke of Washington State. He also managed to add on to his growing list of promises yet to be fulfilled, by promising that states would receive the first portion of the stimulus bill by the end of this week.

So, we're going to spend a ton of money on untested programs, most of which have nothing to do with stimulating anything except re-election campaigns, starting this week. Why would would any of us be surprised that the markets are reacting badly?

UPDATE 1: Reuters calls it like it is: the grand-standing today on the debt was an "all day talk fest."

UPDATE 2: Fox News is reporting that a good many of those at today's Fiscal Responsibility Summit were representing various special interests, none of which are more interested in fiscal responsibility than in promoting their own interests. The transparency pledge takes yet another hit.

17 February 2009

CBO Continues to Sound the Alarm

In, oh so polite language, the Congressional Budget Office has laid out alarming estimates of the debt HR1 is likely to incur in an open letter to Nancy Pelosi. A letter she's likely to take revenge for. The CBO Director is engaged in a futile but important battle to try to get Congress to be accountable for a mountain of debt that will be paid for by generations.

The CBO Director's blog can be found in the blogroll on this site.

07 February 2009

The President sets the bipartisan tone with mockery

While at the Democratic retreat in Williamsburg Thursday night (at a posh hotel, partially paid for by you and me), the President struck a non-bipartisan tone by mocking the Republicans and any concerns they may have on the 'stimulus' bill. Apparently, it's not the Dems' fault that they passed a huge porky bill last fall and failed to set any limits on it.

While speaking to fellow party members, the President indulged in some partisan ranting, making an open mockery his vaunted lack of ideology. When addressing the Republican opposition to the proposed new fleet of cars, the President mocked concerns that such a massive expenditure would do nothing to quickly stimulate the economy and is overspending. Listen to the whole speech when you get a chance.




The President seems willing to assume that anything less than full capitulation is due to sheer stubborness and lack of intelligence. He went on to mock recent statements by Republicans that the stimulus bill is nothing more than a 'spending bill,' saying 'what do you think a stimulus is.'

Well, gee, Mr. President. I thought a stimulus was supposed to help stimulate economic activity NOW, not two years from now and at the expense of the GDP. I thought it should help lots of people get jobs, not a few producing extremely expensive products. I thought you were all for 'shovel-ready' projects, not expenditures that are meaningless to the majority of the country. That would be a stimulus. What you have now is a pork-laden bill, which will only stimulate moderate activity, laden us with generation of debt, and which is a gift to every liberal whose ever dreamed of all-encompassing power.

So much for bipartisanship.

05 February 2009

Only $75 billion to go!

Fox News is reporting that the 'stimulus' plan has now ballooned to $925 billion, and that Senator Reid is trying to get a vote through today or tomorrow. Good luck with that one, Senator, given that the White House is off-message and mired in Limbaugh land, that support for the bill declines with every $1-million tacked on, and that there's dispute among the Democrats themselves. $1-trillion, here we come.

Meanwhile, sites like this one have been springing up offering to help you get your share of the pie - for a fee of course.


Get your pork here!

02 February 2009

Stimulus plan redux

2:00 PM tomorrow is the start of the Senate debate on the 'stimulus' plan.

Side note: if you haven't already done so, write or call your Senators and demand that the pork be stripped from this bill before it can go forward.

The Boston Globe is practically slavering at President Obama's feet as he tries to win over GOP support for the bill, saying that he's 'bending over backwards,' in his attempts to 'ease concerns.' Do you think you could be a little less obvious?

Senator Reid is doing a fantastic job of bringing the doubters by allowing even more pork to be loaded onto the bill.

Senator Mitch McConnell is promising to at least delay passage of the bill until GOP concerns are taken into account.

It looks to be an interesting day tomorrow.

30 January 2009

A reply from Sen. Bill Nelson: Nope, not going to change a thing

Early this week, I wrote to Sen. Bill Nelson (D, FL), one of my two state senators. Sen. Mel Martinez is the other, and I have also written him. I demanded that unless the pork was removed from the stimulus bill, that he vote against it. I didn't actually hold out hope that he would bother, but was particularly disturbed by his reply, which I have pasted below. In essence, the Senator says that he understands that overspending and deficits can be bad, but since this plan (in his estimation) is targeted only on jobs-creation and helping people keep their homes (where he gets that, I have no idea after reading most of the bill), it's not a problem. Much of the letter is pandering drivel, but I'm guessing that this is what many in the Senate are thinking. I'm planning on writing the Senator back to protest being treated like a mindless four-year old, and to reiterate my original objections. I'm not sure what's worse: the drivel from my Senator or the lack of any answer from my Representative. Any thoughts on what to include?

Bill@billnelson.senate.gov
10:30am

Please do not reply to this e-mail. If you need to send another message to Senator Nelson, please use the form on his Web site: http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm#email


Thank you for contacting me about the economic stimulus package.

The American people are hurting. They are losing their homes, their jobs, their businesses and their life savings. Economists across the political spectrum agree that the government needs to take bold and immediate action to stimulate the economy and curb the risk of a protracted economic recession.

The economic stimulus package will provide critical tax relief, shore up unemployment benefits and food stamps, improve access to health care, and promote energy independence. I believe the stimulus package is narrowly targeted to spend and invest in ways that will get the economy moving again.

I understand your concerns about the stimulus package. Last year I voted against spending $700 billion to bail out Wall Street because the bill lacked meaningful relief for homeowners facing foreclosure and didn't include adequate protections for American taxpayers. I am committed to reducing wasteful spending and improving transparency in Federal funding. For too long have we ignored the consequences of a burgeoning Federal deficit.

As Congress considers measures to put the economy on the right track, I will be sure to keep your views in mind. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

P.S. From time to time, I compile electronic news briefs highlighting key issues and hot topics of particular importance to Floridians. If you'd like to receive these e-briefs, visit my Web site and sign up for them at http://billnelson.senate.gov/news/ebriefs.cfm

29 January 2009

Oink! Can I have a do-over please?

The breakdown, of the 'stimulus,' err, Santa's wish-list, passed by the House of Representatives yesterday (without one Republican vote and without 12 Dems, brave souls), in the Wall Street Journal today is astounding. I'll be there at least some voters out there wishing they could have a do-over from last Nov. 2. I just 'loved' Nancy Pelosi's grin as she announced the votes last night - she looked like she was in rictus. This thing is pure pork, and I've already written my Senators to demand they vote against it without substantial revision. We probably do need a stimulus, something this bill ain't.

Here's an excerpt:

We've looked it over, and even we can't quite believe it. There's $1 billion for Amtrak, the federal railroad that hasn't turned a profit in 40 years; $2 billion for child-care subsidies; $50 million for that great engine of job creation, the National Endowment for the Arts; $400 million for global-warming research and another $2.4 billion for carbon-capture demonstration projects. There's even $650 million on top of the billions already doled out to pay for digital TV conversion coupons.

In selling the plan, President Obama has said this bill will make "dramatic investments to revive our flagging economy." Well, you be the judge. Some $30 billion, or less than 5% of the spending in the bill, is for fixing bridges or other highway projects. There's another $40 billion for broadband and electric grid development, airports and clean water projects that are arguably worthwhile priorities.

Add the roughly $20 billion for business tax cuts, and by our estimate only $90 billion out of $825 billion, or about 12 cents of every $1, is for something that can plausibly be considered a growth stimulus. And even many of these projects aren't likely to help the economy immediately. As Peter Orszag, the President's new budget director, told Congress a year ago, "even those [public works] that are 'on the shelf' generally cannot be undertaken quickly enough to provide timely stimulus to the economy."

News widget by Feedzilla


RSS news feeds and News widgets

Buzz of the Day

Apture